Author
Topic: Which one is accurate? (Read 14072 times)

IMO, assuming ideal CFA filters, and an ideal monitor/print, the accurate WB is the one corresponding to that of your monitor. Of course, such ideal things do not exist. Then the yellowish picture is more accurate, assuming that this was the golden hour. The catch is - you have to stare at it long enough preferably in a dark room until your eyes get used to the yellow color. Then you see what you saw when you took the picture, up to the capabilities of your equipment. Catch No.2: You may not want to see what you saw back then, as Neuro said. Then the right WB is whatever makes you happy.

I want to achieve accuracyThe first photo is how my eye saw it and the camera captured it.But the second one is supposed "white balance corrected".

Which one is more accurate then?Thank you

probably the first one

the problem with using a white balance dropper and/or whibal type stuff is that it really only works for certain types of shots that you want the colors to be perfect for under D65 conditions. But you surely do NOT want your golden hour lighting converted into brilliant light overcast noon daylight. Or your crazy changing red/blue/green club lighting to look daylight (not that it could likely even be converted that far back). Or change your cool blue winter evening lighting into crisp white daylight.

The unfortunate thing is that it also means that unless the camera makes an ideal guess to match how human vision would interpret things (sometimes it does well, sometimes not so much) that you need to remember how everything single shot looked into the field. That is why it would be awesome if they'd make the apps that put liveview onto tablets and such color-managed to you could quickly use manual WB and color adjustments in the field to set it how it should look. Otherwise you need to download images, load in managed browser and then try again and repeat which can waste too much time sometimes or buy a $$$$$$ perfectly calibrated mini-monitor.

The first pic is how it looked.The second pic is more colored accurate (after subtracted the sun) via WB correction.

color accuracy or staying true to the original scene?

Like Neuro said, if you need the colours to be faithful to the original scene then a grey card or something is necessary; If the photo is your artwork then whatever looks right, is right.

Jim

Actually I don't believe that he quite said that, not the part about needing the gray card in the field to get things to match faithfully to the original scene. In fact the OP's demo proves that using the gray card would make things look nothing at all like the original scene did.

If you're doing copy reproduction of art, the color must be accurate. If you're taking a picture, set the WB as it pleases you.

+1, Sir

Every Mornitors ( Although Perfected Adjustment) every Hard Prints are Difference in Colors( Difference brand name of the printers).Every Human's Eyes and Hearts are difference in Perception of the colors and Point of View of the Pictures.I love Mr. Neuroanatomist's Words " Set the WB as it please you " = Yes, Sir----We love our hobby, Love Our photos that we create in that moment of our life---and never come back again in that mili second of the time that we press the shutter. AND WE DO NOT CARE that Colors/ That Point of views = are right or wrong.Yes, so many years ago, Every one in that city, in that period, hate the painting of that crazy artist, they say that crazy and trash work----Now, That Paintings cost = many, many Millions US Dollars, and most of the People in this time ( our time) love that masterpiece and think that Crazy Painter are Genius/ Grand Master of Painter/ Super Artist.Who Right or Who wrong Surapon

canon rumors FORUM

The funny thing is almost all photography teachers told us to correct WB for accuracy reproduction.But all people here said the first picture is more accurate because it is closest to what the eye sees.

So can someone give me an example where WB correction gave a closer resemblance of the originalbecause to me, WB correction always makes things different from the original scene.

The funny thing is almost all photography teachers told us to correct WB for accuracy reproduction.But all people here said the first picture is more accurate because it is closest to what the eye sees.

But isn't the first the more accurate WB in terms of what your eye saw, isn't that what reproduction is all about? If you were reproducing midday lighting, then the second would be the more accurate WB. Surely reproduction is all about accuracy at the time of the shot, otherwise, what does accuracy mean?

The first pic is how it looked.The second pic is more colored accurate (after subtracted the sun) via WB correction.

color accuracy or staying true to the original scene?

Like Neuro said, if you need the colours to be faithful to the original scene then a grey card or something is necessary; If the photo is your artwork then whatever looks right, is right.

Jim

Accurate to what? What actually was? What your personal artistic vision saw it as? What it would look like when conforming to your own stylism?

Color balance is really a matter of personal preference when it comes to creative photography. You, the photographer, have to choose what you want, what looks good to you, and what fits your personal style. Style is just as important to photography as literal "this is how IT WAS" kind of accuracy...so long as the goal is to be artistic. So, you have to decide... "Accurate to what?"

If your job is to reproduce reality, then obviously the answer to the question "Accurate to what?" is "Accurate to actual reality." and not some artistic deviation.